Category Archives: Patentability

The Cleveland Clinic Foundation et al. v. True Health Diagnostics LLC

Docket No. 2016-1766 LOURIE, REYNA, WALLACH June 16, 2017 Brief Summary: Patent directed at detecting myeloperoxidase release as a sign of cardiovascular disease ineligible under § 101. DC decision of no contributory or induced infringement affirmed since CCF fell “short … Continue reading

Posted in Contributory Infringement, Inducement to Infringe, Infringement, Patentability, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Rothschild Connected Devices Innovations, LLC v. Guardian Protection Services, Inc. et al. (“ADS Security, L.P.”)

Docket No. 2016-2521 PROST, MAYER, WALLACH June 5, 2017 Brief Summary: DC denial of request for attorney’s fees under § 285 reversed and remanded (due, e.g., to “Rothschild’s willful ignorance of the prior art”). Summary: ADS appealed DC denial of … Continue reading

Posted in Attorney's Fees, Patentability | Leave a comment

AIPLA Legislative Proposal and Report on Patent Eligible Subject Matter

May 12, 2017 The AIPLA issued a proposed revision to § 101 (“Proposal”) that seeks to “creat[e] a new framework with clearly defined statutory exceptions”, “provide a clear, objective test that will result in appropriately broad eligibility”, “expressly reaffirm[] the … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., et al.

Docket No. 2016-1499 LOURIE, REYNA, STOLL April 28, 2017 Brief Summary: DC decision that RC’s claims are ineligible under § 101 affirmed (e.g., “[a]dding one abstract idea (math) to another abstract idea (encoding and decoding) does not render the claim … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Intellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Capital One Financial Company et al.

Docket No. 2016-1077 PROST, WALLACH, CHEN March 7, 2017 Brief Summary: DC grant of SJ for collateral estoppel (issue preclusion) affirmed under Fourth Circuit law and finding of ineligibility under under § 101 affirmed under the two-step Alice/Mayo “abstract idea” … Continue reading

Posted in Appeal, Collateral estoppel, Issue Preclusion, Patentability | Leave a comment

Intellectual Ventures I LLC, et al. v. Erie Indemnity Company et al.

Docket No. 2016-1128, -1132 PROST, WALLACH, CHEN March 7, 2017 Brief Summary: DC finding the IV lacked standing affirmed because assigning rights “‘in and to’ a particular patent” does not “automatically include[s] its child applications” (must explicitly refer to continuations … Continue reading

Posted in Assignment / Ownership, Patentability | Leave a comment

Trading Technologies Int., Inc. v. CQG, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2016-1616 LOURIE, MOORE, O’MALLEY January 18, 2017 Non-precedential Brief Summary: DC finding that claims to trading technology software is patentable subject matter affirmed. Summary: CQG appealed DC decision that US 6,772,132 and 6,766,304 relating to “a method for … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment